My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Agenda - Council Work Session - 10/28/2014
Ramsey
>
Public
>
Agendas
>
Council Work Session
>
2014
>
Agenda - Council Work Session - 10/28/2014
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/17/2025 4:27:59 PM
Creation date
10/29/2014 12:32:53 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Document Type
Agenda
Meeting Type
Council Work Session
Document Date
10/28/2014
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
51
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
(1) Would the Council be comfortable with considering the potential financial obligations that may <br />result from the proposed transaction? <br />The proposed land transaction, which results in no land proceeds, will still require a broker commission fee <br />of 5% (estimated between $65,000 to $87,000) . The City has several financial obligations tied to future land <br />proceeds from HRA owned land located within The COR (i.e. significant Sewer and Water Fund loan <br />repayments, potential street maintenance program, etc.). <br />Selling (or trading) this site to St. Katherine Drexel will result in a tax exempt parcel located within The <br />COR in perpetuity. The City has several future financial obligations tied to property tax revenues within The <br />COR (i.e. TIF obligations, improving Bunker Lake Boulevard, etc.). Tax exempt properties do not provide <br />any funding for regular City maintenance and services (however, all City services will be provided to this <br />user). <br />Based on the land -swap proposal before the Council, Staff is concerned the face value of the two properties <br />involved in this transaction may not be equitable; and should therefore be analyzed in greater detail if this <br />negotiation process moves forward. Staff discussed this proposed project with the City's Financial consultant, <br />Ehlers-- attached to this case is a MEMO outlining the potential financial implications of the proposed land <br />transaction. <br />(2) Does the Council believe a need exists for additional land to expand Central Park in the future? <br />Staff does believe that the preponderance of land adjacent to Central Park should be studied for expansion of <br />the community park by some means. At a minimum, 2-acres parallel to the east line of the park should be <br />conveyed to the City (Fee Title or ROW easement) to solve the parking and vehicular traffic problems that <br />presently exist during tournaments and peak periods. The attachment entitled 'Proposed Parkway' illustrates <br />the 2-acres required for this solution as outlined in green. <br />As indicated, the majority of the 33-acres site immediately adjacent to the 45-acre Central Park should be <br />studied for expansion of the community park, and ultimately discussed as part of the City's Comprehensive <br />Plan. In summary, if the present needs of the community require all of the athletic fields and available space <br />at the park, and the population of Ramsey can be expected to increase by nearly 10,000 people over the next <br />twenty (20) years (additional growth above and beyond this planning period), it is logical there will need to <br />be more community park area added. Two aspects are self evident here, the first is that as the community <br />builds out, there is simply less land available or suitable for a community park, and what there may be, <br />increases exponentially in value. The second is there are significant benefits and savings of having one larger <br />park versus two smaller parks serving the same functions. There is a reduced need for redundant <br />infrastructure (E.g. water wells, electric and sanitary services, buildings, playgrounds, park roads and parking <br />etc.). Plus there are savings on maintenance and operations costs over time as well. Additionally, families <br />find it inconvenient or logistically impractical to have children in programs at different parks at the same <br />time - particularly for tournaments and events. This is likewise true of coaches, umpires, and especially the <br />hundreds of volunteers that are required to host practices, games and tournaments in any given season. <br />(3) Would the Council like Staff and St. Katherine Drexel to continue negotiating a potential land <br />transaction in The COR; or should different alternatives be identified and considered? <br />STAFF COMMENTS: <br />It should be noted, St. Katherine Drexel is an asset for the City of Ramsey and the greater community. Their <br />organization is intimately involved with countless initiatives to improve and strengthen the community and region. <br />From an economic development perspective, St. Katherine is proposing a quality facility that would become a focal <br />point/asset for The COR. Additionally, the proposed 500 seat auditorium would drive significant traffic to the COR <br />for worship services and events. Said traffic is beneficial to retail businesses. Regardless of how the Council <br />decides to move forward with this specific proposal, Staff would recommend continuing to work with St. Katherine <br />Drexel to secure permanent solution for their long term needs in our community. <br />Timeframe: <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.